i wish we may be permitted to pursue it, but the temper and folly of our enemies may not leave us in our choice." we salute him and his memory on his birthday. have a great night everybody. we'll see you back here tomorrow night at seven. ♪ >> and eric bolling in for bill o'reilly who is on vacation. thanks for watching us. our top story tonight, president trump with the benefit of 84 days in office has recently modified his positions on nato, china, russia and syria can. you'll never believe this, but the mainstream media painting this is a negative. >> from president trump, a flurry of flip-flops. >> here's the problem was nato. it's obsolete. >> as it was obsolete. it's no longer obsolete. >> that rhetorical reversal on nato just one of several in the past 24 hours.

>> from president trump, a very different tone about the country his previous lee called an enemy. >> president xi jinping wants to do the right thing. >> what a change from candidate trump who repeatedly used china as a punching bag. >> we can't continue to allow china to rate our country and that's what they're doing. >> right now are not getting along with russia at all. we may be at an all-time low in terms of relationship with russia. spirit that is not what candidate trump thought was meant to be. >> are going to have a great relationship with cutin and russia. >> joining us now from reaction, doctor sebastian, the deputy assistant to president trump. we saw donald trump devolving on some of these issues but is it that also what he promised to make deals, the art of the deal to make america great again? >> there is no one better. i really recommend people read his book. it is the art of the deal.

what we have seen is eight years of divisiveness of the obama white house dividing our nation against itself and dividing us against our allies and friends. in just 84 days, president trump has replaced divisiveness with the decisiveness, whether to do with the border, whether to do with manufacturing, weathers to do with nato or whether it's to do with our enemies and isis or in this case, mechanical weapons attack last week. we have changed the geopolitical reality in the world in just a matter of weeks. >> how did they do that? tonight's a big 21,000 bombs dropped on afghanistan, has that affected the geopolitical balance or at least the way the rest of the world sees donald trump? >> absolutely because it means that people now understand just how much the president means what he says. when he says unequivocally in front of the joint session of

congress at cpap, when he says i am going to obliterate isis literally, when he says i'm going to wipe the islamic state off the face of the earth, it's not empty rhetoric. if you read the memoirs of secretary gates, of secretary panetta, it's stunning. obama's own principles talk about nsc meetings that last for three to four hours with nobody taking a decision. that was the last eight years. that was the reality of the red lines. along comes president trump, that's gone. we have a threat, we promise to deal with it, and were dealing with it right now. >> eric: doctor, talk about this in moab, the big bomb they drop today. was that on isis? i understand it was on isis but was directed towards isis and with that directed towards north korea or directed towards iran? >> let's look at last week. the cruise missile attack on the airbase in syria wasn't just about sending message about

weapons of mass destruction and syria. it was a message about weapons of mass instruction anywhere, and is also a message about nations that sponsor mass murdering regimes. so you're absolutely right. this president understands that diplomacy without forced behind it is nothing. it's words, it's pieces of pape paper. statecraft and leadership are when you lose use these things to reinforce one another. speak >> eric: i'm sorry to cut you off, assad has said this is all at fabrication. they made up by the u.s. government to find a reason to bomb assad. trump says were not going into syria, but if assad does use chemicals again, will we bomb syria? >> we don't give our playbook away. you're my friend, but we don't do it. that's the last eight years prayed we don't telegraph in advance to the threats out there what were going to do because that's how you lose. that's a strategic. do you think assad is going to use chemical weapons again?

>> eric: i think assad is crazy and i also think kim jong-un is crazy. will donald trump they use a preemptive strike? is not preempted but what would it take to use a strike from the u.s. in korea and the watters north korea? >> again, were not going to give our playbook away but i'll tell you one thing for sure, the assad regime as a state of other nations. other nations prop this nation up and keep it alive. those sponsoring nations are sitting down right now, i guarantee you that, and they're going through a very simple calculus in their minds pretty they're asking themselves where is my redline for how long i'm going to support somebody like this who uses chemical weapons on innocent women and children? that's a geopolitics. that's statecraft and the president has sent that message. it is not just about syria. it's about those nations who have kept cereal alive. >> you mentioned these nations, when president trump decided to

launch 59, cox, he decided that while president xi jinping was at dinner with him. we'll get to dinner and a second, i have to drop missiles on syria. and that he direct his nato security council to vote no contest or no vote as far as sanction syria because of that meeting with donald trump at mar-a-lago? >> you'd have to ask the communist party of china. >> eric: what you think? >> i think those things are not unrelated to each other. look at the decision with regards to coal purchases. china is not an irrational act. it's you have to understand the chinese government is not illogical. they are perhaps one of the most strategic nations out there and as a result, they know talk benefit analysis, and they know what national interest means and they understand sometimes supporting somebody to the extent at which they undermine

my interest is not a good idea. >> eric: has china become a better friend of the united states since they put putin in russia? >> china understands you can't undermine and subvert america the way you could in the last eight years. there may be things we can cooperate on and there may be lines that we draw in terms of how far we can cooperate, but that's fine. they don't have to be our best buddies who come with the question is -- >> it seems that the trump administration is got a little bit tougher with russia because of our relationship getting a little bit stronger with china. >> isn't that interesting? what happened to all the stories about russia? this is when you realize just how fake the fake news is. it's about american interest rate i can assure you one thing. president trump is a patriot and a pragmatist at the same time, and that's why you're seeing the decisiveness you're seeing today. >> eric: going to leave her right there.

thank you very much. now his turn to nancy, former u.s. advisor and national security advisor to president clinton. she joins us from jacksonville, florida. he listens that back and forth with doctor, first of all your thoughts, did anything jump out at you especially the relationship between putin and trump and xi jinping from china and trump? >> first, nice to see you and thanks for having me. i think sebastian's right that the president is a patriot trying to do the right thing. but this pivot on all the things that we disagree is the geopolitical world moving to donald trump. it's really donald trump of moving towards reality and away from some of the campaign rhetoric that got him elected, but is not related to facts and is frankly not realistic. though i think it's a good thing that he is pivoting. i think is a good thing that he's recognizing that some of these things were wrong. i think it's a good thing. >> eric: 's ears donald trump

pivoting to reality comes on the heels of 59 tomahawk's in syria and 21,000 palm in afghanistan. >> changing his position on nato, on china, getting away from china, the knowledge obamacare, health care thing. >> eric: some people said that was a problem with president obama that he didn't do things like this. are you agreeing? >> i think the action he took on syria was exactly right. it was a measured response to a second chemical weapons attack and i think that he is broadly been supported for that, and i applaud that. it's a bigger question than just one bomb. yes, i think that with the right thing but does that mean he's got a strategy for syria? what does it mean on russia? is a still thinking that russia is run by someone who can be our friend? what is it mean in terms of

trying to lead in the middle east and have an american plan? you got to have a plan for going to use military orders, absolutely agree with sebastian. diplomacy does not work if you don't back it up with military force. >> eric: the call to the uss vincent the aircraft carrier 100,000 tons of diplomacy had towards north korea. they ran. nobody's talking about them. they have to see these maneuvers and say wait a minute, were not dealing with obama anymore. >> the iran deal is working, the nuclear weapons program is halted so that seems to be working. i think the trump administration has agreed to keep it going. the tougher problems are what are you going to do with north korea? it's a very difficult thorny problem the president from the first president bush have tried to deal with. it's a crazy regime. it's a very difficult problem. i think the president's right to try to get china to be the linchpin there to move it forward. but you need diplomacy in the

world and yes you need it backed by force and presidents have figured out that out and i think the president needs some strategies that go along with this. he's got to listen to his advisors and come up with how are we going to do this? >> eric: how do you do that connect you with the u.n. ambassador. in north korea coming of three generations spread the founder of north korea rhea was kim jong-un's grandfather. what would it take to change power in north korea? you have to break up the whole family structure. >> you do. i think president trump has asked for broad wide-ranging issues, options on north korea from toppling the regime to trying to push military and trying to work with china. i think i've seen in meetings where people struggle with these decisions and you end up having to take the best of really awkward options, and i think that's what president trump is rightly trying to grapple with.

>> eric: is that the united korean peninsula, one korea? or is china taking over? >> it is eventually one korea that's united and democratic, but that's a long way off and it's going to require much tougher diplomacy with china. in the broader picture, look where president trump is. is pivoting towards reality, putting force and diplomacy in a good thing. his problem and i'll just put this out there is he got elected with very extreme statements that did not relate to reality and how is he going to keep this intact? >> eric: a more extreme than dropping 59 tomahawk's in syria and a 21,000-pound moab into afghanistan correct thank you so much. when we come right back, the former trump campaign advisor was surveilled by the fbi for possible ties to russia. that man right there, carter page will be here to tell his story. stay with us.

>> eric: and the personal story segment tonight, as the democrats love to remind you, the fbi has confirmed is looking into possible improper links between the russian government and the trump campaign. one thing that emerged as part of the investigation, carter page. he worked as an unpaid formal foreign policy advisor for less than a year. according to the report by the washington post confirmed in part by excuses catherine herridge, last summer at secret court gave the fbi

permission to spy on page, an american citizen. page previously worked as an investment baker in moscow. he joins us now. thank you for joining us. let's get this right out front. why did you go to moscow? >> i was invited to give the graduation speech at new economics school. and i spoke in that university in moscow for many, many years, most of the top universities in moscow have spoken with on many occasions. >> when we were there, where you are representing the trump administration? >> i made that absolutely clear in every state. >> eric: it'd overlap with your tenure in the campaign? >> you talk about fake narratives, that was really something that was completely -- >> eric: you go over there and make some speeches as a professor and you end up meeting some of these russian people, operatives.

>> i said hello briefly in cleveland, so that was nothing. >> eric: everything over in russia was incidental? >> less than incidental. >> eric: what about the russian banker that you knew in new york? >> there was his case against a few operatives that were here, and i happen to know one of the diplomats that was based here, and that -- i deal with diplomats all the time at the u.n., et cetera. >> eric: expand on that a little bit, so you bump into them in what capacity? >> in this example, one of my business partners from asia was speaking at asian society on park avenue. i happen to say hello to him and we struck up a little dialogue and i met him once for coffee, offered him some ideas, that was about it. >> eric: what time frame was this? >> this was 2013.

>> eric: let's fast forward to when the trump administration became relevant. whether any meetings with any of the russians? >> there's always for example, may have seen hello to a few people at times, certainly never any negotiations. none of that discussion. why do you think you were unmasked? wire you surveilled and wire you unmask? >> it's interesting. the big "washington post" report this week. it goes back to just creating a false narrative, and i was laughing when nancy was saying to you that the president needs to get in touch with reality. the reality which the last administration created which is such a complete disaster that they needed to kind of find some

new possibilities. >> eric: did susan rice -- who do you think went to the pfizer corporation to get for permission to surveilled you? >> i have learned all the false accusations that have come out against me that i'm not going to speculate. again, i'm very encouraged by all this new information that's coming out about some of these unethical practices and potentially illegal practices. such as false evidence. director carmi said politicians lie all the time not so many words but people can like the media and there's no law against that. however, when you introduce false evidence in a court of law including the pfizer court, that is illegal. let's see what happens. >> eric: you think there was some false evidence to surveilled you? >> certainly a lot of indication. for example, he relates letter last august citing that the

dossier eventually would come out in january saying that i met all these sanctioned officials, et cetera which was completely false based on a private investigator that people associated with the clinton campaign hired. >> eric: did you work with him? >> i never met him. never had the opportunity. >> eric: why do you think your name was unmasked by susan rice? >> i'm not going to jump to any conclusions. i'm very encouraged that all of the lies that have been a drag on this administration are finally coming out into the open. let's see what happens. so many people have lied against me from the clinton campaign, many of their surrogates, many of the think tanks that have supported them, center for american progress, et cetera. let's see what actually comes out but i'm not going to speculate. >> eric: we heard about mike flynn being unmasked, we heard about carter page being unmasked. are there more names to follow?

>> we shall see. i deal in facts, so i'm not concerned and we can cross that bridge when we get to it. >> eric: why did susan rice get involved with this, for what reason? >> i wrote my trade installer project at the naval academy doing research on information using information as a political weapon, the executive branch and legislative branch of governmen government. this was information as a political weapon. >> eric: carter page, thank you very much. next on the run down, syria's murder dictator is now denying he used chemical weapons. that's incredible. the truth about the butcher of damascus when the factor return returns.

>> eric: the impact segment tonight, a stunning denial from syrian dictator bashar al-assad. last week, we were all sickened by the appalling images of children in syria gasping for air after there was a chemical attack but now assad is claiming he could not have gassed his own people because syria has no chemical weapons. >> definitely 100%, we don't have an arsenal. were not going to use it and we have many indications if you don't have proof because no one has complete information or evidence in. but you have indication. >> eric: joining us now for reaction in washington, former state department official and from the foundation of defense of democracies. let's start with you. so bashar al-assad says not only does he not have chemical weapons, all those images we've seen that probably inspired his tomahawk missile strike, he said those were all fabricated by us. >> your skepticism is accurate. the only thing i disagree with you about is that this is

stunning. this is how assad operates pretty is in denial, he is a liar, he is a war criminal. he said many opportunities to leave syria and he probably never will let go and he'll end up in a ditch like saddam hussein or like qaddafi. but the missile strikes last week were really important because they sent a signal that the u.s. is no longer going to look the other way when he engages in mass atrocities against civilians. that's important but make no mistake, it's not going to be an easy effort and just one set of missile strikes isn't going to change the dynamic completely. it sends a message, it puts military options back on the table, which is what was missing from the negotiation. we now need to get back to the negotiation table with the military option as a leverage to get syria and assad. >> eric: where have you been all these years cannot government or having arguments with you when barack obama was president who, thinking that

side of the story. >> in 2013, i thought barack obama should've done missile strikes against assad in. >> eric: might have saved us a lot of time and money. >> i fully agree. >> eric: to donald trump to the right thing by sending those tomahawk missiles into syria? >> absolutely. he did a number of things. he began to reestablish strategic deterrence in the world, very important not just assad but it ran, the north koreans understand that america not only has power, but has a determination and the will to use it in its best interests at various times. also, president trump was enforcing international law. a lot of times it's hard to say what international law is. is not one of those cases. the use of chemical weapons by assad violates the chemical weapons convention which assad subscribed to. >> eric: let me play little devil's advocate here. is bombing schools and hospitals with conventional weapons as well.

i'm just playing devil's advocate. there are people saying if you're going to use that redline, why not use all the red lines that are already preestablished? >> the only reason is the use of redline, certain weapons that have been banned and syria agreed would be banned, agreed they would use, claimed they had given up, this is such a clear redline that if you don't enforce it, you're really saying it's a law of the jungle which is what we seen in syria and a lot of the middle east over the recent years. no laws whatsoever, no rules whatsoever. even the u.s. enforces some rules in the world where there are no rules because there's no international community to do it. the u.s. as it were no one it. >> eric: you bring up a good point but where's the u.n. in all of this? >> i read an article this week, you can justify this missile attack based on the u.n. doctor and responsibility to protect but the u.n. went missing on this. the u.n. has not been able to pass a resolution to the

security council authorizing the use of force. the reason is because russia has blocked every single security council resolution related to syria. that's why unfortunately the u.s. had to act on its own, which is controversial under international law but in my view, it is justified because no one else would take action and we as a country and all countries have a responsibility to protect innocent civilians when mass atrocities have been happening as they have been for the last six plus years resulting in 500,000 deaths. >> eric: very quickly both of you. to strikes in two weeks, who was the recipient of the message, the strongest recipient of that message? >> assad number one, russian number two. >> what do you say? >> i would say north korea and iran and most importantly but it's a message to all our adversaries, all are enemies and all her allies as well that were back in the game, that's no longer what it spent in the last eight years.

>> eric: you know with been left out? russia and china. i said russia is your biggest threat. you said assad. one quick final thought, what is the u.s. relationship with russia going forward? >> it's going to be a complex one. putin has very big ambitions. putin is the kind of guy who sees you either as a panther or a poodle. either a slave or master. is it possible that hopefully he sees that trump is not something going to roll over for him, he'll be more willing to have realistic discussions. he was to have a war report, can you keep that? i don't know. but his support for iran, whose rallying cry is part of the iranian empire, he needs to change on that. i think trump is going to be tough with him. >> eric: quick point, has been three turned from poodle to

panther regarding donald trump to mexico we don't know what putin is going to do. assured, he doesn't like the missile strikes and is worried about what they're going to do next and syria but he is strong. he has a lot of military forces on the ground. he has a significant impact in pushing back the moderate rebels that we support. we don't know what his next chess move is going to be. but it's essential that we get him to stand down and get assad to step down. >> eric: this countries become a paper tiger, i would say that no longer the case. thank you very much. plenty more ahead as the factor moves along this evening. a lawyer for the man dropped off the united airlines flight said his injuries are horrendous. it will tell you all about that. and later, possible nuclear activity in north korea, that's not good. we'll analyze the situation. we hope you stay tuned for those reports.

>> eric: the factor follow-up segment tonight, united airlines remains under fire for forcibly removing doctor david dao from a flight from chicago to louisville on sunday. today his daughter spoke up for the first time. >> what happens my dad should've never happened to any human being regardless of the circumstance. we were horrified and shocked and second to learn what had happened to him and to see what had happened to him. we hope that in the future, nothing like this happens again. >> eric: dao's attorney said legal action against the airlines is likely. >> if you're going to eject a passenger, under no circumstances can it be done with the unreasonable force or violence. that's the law. if unreasonable force and violence is used under a set of

circumstances, the common carrier united airlines in this case is responsible. >> eric: joining us now with reaction from fort lauderdale, attorney mark aguilar and from los angeles. who is also a lawyer and but i believe you say united did nothing wrong so we did find that one guy. [laughter] >> i didn't say they did nothing wrong. i am of plaintiff's attorney, i exclusively representing victims of corporate conduct where they engage in unsafe behavior and her people all the time. that's all i do. as a plaintiffs attorney coming up to look at these cases and vet them and be very careful about the cases you take. there are a lot of alarms about this case. when i first thought on the news and i started reading about it and you read the transcript of the second dialogue between doctor dao and officer, it's unusual. first question is, who referred pieces to get off the plane when an officer asks you to get off the plane came back had doctor

dao agreed to get off the plane as i think most citizens would do and have the dispute as to whether the airline was mistreating him or not treating him properly or whether they owe him money or don't owe him money handled after his off the plane after the plane can leave, then we wouldn't be here. we wouldn't read about his felony. >> eric: let me bring mark in. because i've got to think he let him speak for himself, would take his case given the opportunity. >> i think she was literally a knocked over his secretary to get to the phone to take this case if this guy called his attorney. i don't know how intellectually honest he's being. the only question is how big this check is going to be? united airlines and all the airlines do legally have the right to bump passengers. they don't however have the right to bump their teeth, their noses, and their heads. >> eric: he said it's a very big distinction here. this guy ended up missing a few

teeth and a broken nose. >> absolutely. first of all, i am intellectually very honest and i would not personally take this case. i have the luxury of rejecting a majority of cases. i do. i'm not in it for the money. i minute to make the world a safer place. doctor dao unfortunately has a checkered past. he has a felony conviction. >> what does that have to do with anything? >> eric: counselors. you're muddying the victim here. >> unfortunately, you have to realize if this case goes to trial, 99% of cases are resolved. united is probably going to make the common sense decision to settle the case but if doctor dao and his attorneys are unreasonable wanting millions or billions of dollars, united can take this case to trial and at trial, a jury will more likely hear of his checkered past, of the fact that he has a felony for prescribing controlled substances -- >> objection, relevance.

>> eric: let me get mark in here. >> i know how judges rule. >> eric: does the defense get this in and should they? >> they absolutely should not. when you hear it, you go that looks bad. that has nothing to do with whether they used excessive force in the situation. and they did. their stock is down over $2 billion because the court of public opinion and knows that this was handled improperly. this is the only attorney who somehow wouldn't take this case. i find that to be unbelievable. >> i agree they mishandled it, but it would come into evidence. if doctor dao made a claim that he is suffering to -- >> it's irrelevant. >> if he made a claim which he would that he suffered a psychiatric injury and, the defense will hire a forensic psychologist or psychiatrist that will go through every single stressor in this doctor's

life in the last 20 years. below are at a big bad check is what's going to happen. >> that's true. i think united will and should settle this case. >> seven figures. >> legal commentary of what would happen when this case went to trial and why it's not necessarily an open and shut case for doctor dao's entitled for millions of dollars. i think doctor dao should have complied, gotten off the plane and we wouldn't be here. i told my family and friends what i heard about this. >> they shouldn't have treated him like a pinata either. >> eric: we need to leave it right there. if united just went ahead and doubled or tripled or quadrupled that offer, of 800 or whatever this would've all been solved. tanks so much. directly ahead, escalating tensions over north korea's nuclear program. will the u.s. take military action? expert analysis moments away.

>> eric: thanks for staying with us. i'm eric bolling standing in for bill o'reilly. satellite imagery suggest north korea may be preparing for yet another nuclear test on saturday, a major national holiday there amid the rising tensions, correspondent greg cal caught travel to the highly isolated state. >> you're looking at thousands of citizens of pyongyang coming out and very well organized

orchestrated event opening up a new neighborhood here in the capital. the idea by the regime is to get the semblance of order. it could be semblance of a functioning city despite the sanctions, despite the problems over the nuclear and missile crisis, they say they are moving forward. they say they are functioning and this is what we are saying. >> actually just a few hundred yards from where we were, north korean leader kim jong-un is cutting a ribbon on that government-backed building project. officials calling it a sign of the times against the united states and the sanctions them. as an advance of saturday's anniversary of the birthdate of the founder of this country, kim il-sung. he is the grandfather of the current leader, kim jong-un. now there are new reports of possible preparations for yet another detonation of a nuclear device by north korea to mark the day and missiles in the past have been launched to mark the date as well. >> eric: joining us now for

reaction as gordon chan, former policy analyst and author of nuclear showdown, north korea takes on the world. and from brunswick maine, fox news military analyst colonel david hunt who is author of the novel without mercy. how worried should we be and take us inside the mentality of kim jong-un? >> within about four years, north korea will be able to make a nuke. they've already got three missiles that can hit the lower 48 states, they just can't put a nuke on them. but a kit they can put a nuke on their noto missile and that can hit the pan and chemical weapons. we talked about chemical weapons in syria since the mid-1990s, north korea has been helping syria on chemical weapons. >> eric: talk about the mentality of actually pressing the button. >> kim jong-un has basically all end of january,eshold of risk. there's been instances of instability. there have been the assassination of his older half-brother but there's also been a demotion of the minister

of state security, one of the most important officials. there was a killing of five of his subordinates, ulcers of things indicating problems of the top of the north korean military. this means that this guy has a low threshold of risk, a very different risk calculus than we think you should have. >> eric: he's got a twitchy trigger finger so to speak. what are military options? >> there actually very limited. in the demilitarized zone, 15 artillery pieces and north korea all pointing 30 miles south of 10 million populated city called seoul korea. every word game we've done, i spent six years in korea, i commanded the dmc and had company on a staff doing terrorism for the olympics. every war game it's ever been done always ends up with the nuclear option because the artillery and the preparation for 50 years and north korea are massively expensive. i don't see the last five nukes that have gone off their who

have very limited options, nonconventional. and the problem is is nuclear. >> eric: general keane said even if kim jong-un on this saturday's celebration of grandfather's birth or whatever this is honored, even if he does test a missile, and that shouldn't be enough for us to strike north korea. >> i just said that. the options are massively limited. every war game we have has staggering amount of casualties. the only way you're going to get out this is with nukes. as we just heard and we know, north koreans have nukes and the ability to reach seoul korea within three to 6 minutes of launching. >> eric: i think the colonel is saying we would have to wait for a nuclear strike on seoul korea or one of our other tokyo. >> when we saw a missile that was filled and ready to go, for

the nuke was on top of it, we would take that out one way or another. were not going to allow that missile into the air. there's 25 million people installed, and north korea ends of the fourth-largest military, forward deployed just 30 miles away, this is going to be a tragedy of unprecedented proportions. this is basically going to be a couple hundred thousand casualties in the first two hours. >> eric: colonel, using the 21,000 pounds of moab bomb that was dropped on afghanistan had any effect on kim jong-un? >> no. that's the biggest weapon, a nuclear weapon. he is paid attention to a lot of things but this is a crazy man and the issue, it's a dark black community. we can't say in it. so the intelligence community is very blind here. a military option is limited. i don't think we're going to wait today to get nuked. i'm telling you that's the end result of our going to war with north korea. have to use nukes to get after

stuff in these mountains. very difficult target. >> eric: what do you say cannot do things at any effect on the mentality of kim jong-un? >> uses on an underground network of facilities. no country has more military facilities underground the north korea. his father spent six weeks in a bunker during the 2003 iraq war because he was so afraid of george w. bush. i think kim jong-un is going to try to stay out of public for a little while because he understands that he has a low threshold for the use of force and is actually willing to exert american power for good. >> eric: one of the things that we say were not allowed to do and i guess legally were not allowed to even talk about doing as an administration, how do you get rid of be 12? kim jong-un, i'm sorry, do you get rid of him? you quietly have some operations to take him out? >> it's the problem with killing

an individual in the document is not that difficult. the issue is having someone in place that's in your favor. and we've been terrible at that in my lifetime. we can kill leaders, we have. libby is a great example. we can take him out if that's what you want to do, but what comes after him is the issue and normally, we don't have a control over that. it's a risky proposition. >> eric: what does come after kim jong-un? >> you of the chinese military moving south to sort of try to get the nuke. also the archives. the chinese don't want to secede their relationship between beijing and pyongyang. also south korea and the u.s. moving north, that's an extremely dangerous situation because were going to meet someplace north korea and i do hope that they work this stuff out, but the chinese don't want to talk to us about this. >> eric: this is a scary proposition. thank you guys both. a quick reminder, two of bill's books are currently on "the new york times" bestseller list. old school, life in the same

line as number one and killing the rising sun's number three and you can get either one for free if you sign up or become a billoreilly.com premium member. also there are still tickets available to see bill, dennis miller, and jesse watters onto her. the details on billoreilly.com. up next, paying to play shenanigans and corruption on a massive scale right in the halls of congress and insiders expose when the factor comes right bac back.

>> eric: and our second personal story segment tonight, and eye-opening insider's account of the massive corruption in our halls of congress. joining us now from washington, republican congressman, the author of the book trina swan, how washington corruption is worse than you think. thank you congressman.

how bad is it in washington? >> it's bad. we don't get the right answer because we have so many incentives to go the wrong way, and we need to send better people to washington, d.c., to represent us. number two, we need to change the incentive structure. >> eric: give us an idea of what kind of crime, corruption, and cronyism that's going on. >> one example is that in order to be on a committee or any committee, and a ways and means appropriations, you need to dues. you need to pay dues to a republican or democratic campaign committee and those dues determine who get bond. that's corrupt. to put that kind of pressure on people to pay $450,000 to be a chair the committee is the wrong thing, since the wrong message the american people. >> eric: i'm putting together a book a little bit along the same lines of what i find is that lobbying seems to be ground zero for a lot of crime,

corruption, and cronyism going on in d.c. talk to us about how profitable it is to be a lobbyist in d.c.? >> i've never been a lobbyist but i'm sure they make a lot of money. they have a lot of money to give. >> eric: you know how profitable it is to be a lobbyist in d.c. >> lobbyists make a lot of money and they been a lot of money to members of congress to their campaigns for the national republican campaign committee, and they have a lot of influence in washington, d.c. >> eric: should we be closing that money flow, that pipeline of funds from corporate and special interests right into the pockets of people like yourself? >> there's two different kinds of donations. there are ideological donations that are made based on someone being a conservative or liberal, than there are transactional donations that are made based on someone voting for a certain bill. we should absolutely close in the leakage between voting a certain way on a certain piece of legislation and receiving campaign contributions.

>> eric: is a big deal what you just recommended right there. your colleagues on both sides of the aisle might not like hearing that. >> i'm sure they don't. there are some of my colleagues and the freedom caucus and other conservatives that do like to hear that because we're here to do the right thing for the american people and everyone in congress should be doing that. >> eric: you said you're part of the freedom caucus. i did notice you believe on your point of view, you are pro-health care, looking at the paul ryan bill and you are in favor of that. is that right? >> right before the bill was pulled, i visited with the speaker and told him i would be voting in favor of that piece of legislation, that's correct. >> eric: why is that sir? the freedom caucus i understood was going to focus, what about the bill do you think was going to be beneficial to the american people? >> at the president made some moves that made the bill more conservative along with the speaker. i thought it was the first step in the right direction.

i think the president should acknowledge the fact that he made a great nomination for the supreme court. he has picked a great cabinet. he has issued executive orders that have been really positive. >> eric: no doubt. i'm just trying to stay on his health care issue because i'm trying to figure out how did the bill become more conservative. it didn't seem like it was becoming a more economical to the american people. >> there was a work requirement put in for medicaid, that was a real benefit and a great first step and what needs to be done. we address an issue concerning existing health benefits that would have empowered the states to make changes and drive down the cost of premiums to americans. i thought those were good things. >> eric: are we getting close to the freedom caucus to be okay with the new health care bill? >> i would say about a third of them were okay before and i think will find another third that will be in favor of it as we continue down the road. >> eric: congressman, thank you for joining us tonight. if you want to hear more from congressman, you can check out

his interview on the contribute in factor podcasts that's on billoreilly.com and itunes. keeping with the congressman's theme, you can preorder my book the swamp, washington's murky pool of corruption and cronyism and how trump can train it. the details available at eric bolling.com. up next year, just a week after voting itself in century city, michigan town reverses itself one week later. we'll have that strange story in a minute.

>> eric: in the back of the book segment tonight, an incredible story in lansing, michigan. last night, that same city council voted to rescind its decision to make it a sanctuary city. they voted last night, to keep it that way. absent for last night's vote

after also voting to make lansing a sanctuary city. ladies, thank you for joining us. you are in favor of the vote that went down a week ago. how did that switch to let's rescind that boat? vote? >> i wish i could tell you. there were to go council members that called a special meeting. they had their reasons and everyone came to the table again. i voted to keep the sanctuary city clause in the resolution. >> and i voted to remove it. >> eric: on why it was rescinded, your thoughts? >> i see this as an unnecessary controversy that was created over a specific word for political reasons in a local election year. >> eric: what are you talking about? >> this is a mayoral election year, we have a sitting council member member who is running for

mayor and what disturbs me the most is all of us, regardless of our views on political issues, we need to be concerned about our first amendment rights right now. which is our freedom of expression. why does our government in d.c. trying to dictate words that we can use in lansing, michigan? >> eric: what is the word that she is talking about? >> the word "sanctuary." >> eric: it represents a policy. it's a policy, a political law enforcement policy. >> it's a policy that depends on which communities adopt them. the word is completely undefined as a political definition. he has suspended his list of sanctuary cities -- speedo demark >> the meeting was

called over the word "sanctuary" >> this is about allowing illegals to find sanctuary -- i only have a few seconds. this is how the democratic process works. you are elected by the people to speak for them and if the people overwhelmingly say no sanctuary city, guess what? no sanctuary sanctuary city. >> the voters in lansing did not overwhelmingly say that. the majority of people that spoke -- >> eric: the vote went the other way last night. >> i voted with the people of lansing. >> as did i. >> eric: the room -- >> if you are referring to the chamber of commerce, the majority of them do not live in the city. >> eric: this is the end of the show, ladies, thank you very

much. i am eric bolling, in for bill o'reilly. please remember the spin stops here, because we are looking out for you. >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight" ." forget the explosion of a single tomahawk mission demark missile today. the u.s. dropped the mother of all bombs, that is literally its name. the most powerful explosion ever, the weapons used -- there are a lot, in contrast to the previous one. watch. >> everyone knows exactly what happened. what i do is i authorize my military. we have the greatest military in the world. we have done its job as usual. we've given them total